"Thomas F. Unke" wrote in message
...
"Peter Webb" writes:

Pleasingly, you have dropped the claims of "ten thousands of Iraqis
killed by American cluster bombs", any claim of harm from "depleted
uranium", have admitted "the wedding massacre" was an unfortunate
accident with some Iraqi culpability, and have acknowledged that
there is no substantiated evidence that of "the poor tortured to
death".

Finally you resort to plain lies.

End of discussion.


What's the lie?

You have dropped the claims of "ten thousands of Iraqis killed by American
cluster bombs". The words "cluster bomb" have not been used by you in any
post after your first, nor in any of the links. You have quite literally
dropped the claim that this true rather than attempting to defend it. Which
is what I said above.

You have dropped any claim of harm from depleted Uranium. After I posted the
link to a WHO report that identified that it wasn't radioactive and there
was no threat of harm to locals, you posted a 1999 warning to exercise care
when entering exploded tanks (doh); since then, you have posted no claim of
harm. Nor have you disputed the WHO findings. Again, you have simply dropped
the claim. Which is what I said above.

Your own post regarding the wedding massacre admitted that it was not
pre-meditated and accepted that the Iraqis were shooting AK47s into the air
when US planes were flying overhead. Insofar as this was the proximate
cause, there was clearly some Iraqi culpability in the accident, a point you
did not dispute. Which is what I said above.

You did not dispute that there is no substantiated evidence of "the poor
being tortured to death", and nor have you subsequently provided any
substantiation. You have dropped the claim. Which is what I said above.

So exactly how am I lying in what I said above?